Improving the Oklahoma Prison System
Implement Truth in Sentencing:
Remove the Governor from the Parole Process
By an Oklahoma Inmate
Oklahoma is the last state in the Union to have the governor involved in the parole process. Our governor is over-burdened enough with his everyday duties. How can he be expected to have time to adequately review the file of each inmate that is recommended for parole by the parole board - possibly several hundred of them per month? And if he does not have time to review them properly, can he make the best possible judgment concerning approval or denial of those paroles?
The Oklahoma governor appoints 3 of the 5 Pardon and Parole Board members. Surely these individuals that he hand picks reflect the values of the governor himself. He should not have to oversee their decisions or second guess them.
One of the most distressing aspects of this situation is that the governor, who has not met or spoken with the inmates in question, can override the recommendations of the board members who have met and interviewed the inmates. Why do we suppose that one individual, the governor, has more wisdom than the five members of the parole board who have been appointed specifically for this job?
Oklahoma is #1 in the nation in incarceration of women and #3 in incarceration of men. The cost of warehousing men and women in Oklahoma has sky-rocketed. Surely this money could be better spent elsewhere…education, roads, bridges, etc. The cost of imprisonment for a medium security inmate per year is $20,071.35, almost 4 times greater than the average cost of a public school education for one child per year.
Oklahoma prisons are severely overcrowded with over 25,000 people currently incarcerated and a projected 29,000 expected to be behind bars by 2016. According to an audit of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections done by MGT this increase is due to more crimes falling under the 85% law which requires that 85% of the sentence must be served before an inmate is considered for parole and the fact that parole approval in Oklahoma has historically been very low. Paroling more people would help with this overcrowding problem and removing the governor from the parole process would help in expediting the paroles.
If a large enough percentage of inmates were paroled the remaining inmates could be housed in state owned Department of Correction facilities, thereby eliminating the need for using private prisons. This would save the state millions of dollars per year and cut down on profits gained by locking up human beings. The subsequent savings would be handed down to the taxpayers of Oklahoma giving them a much needed financial break.
The Oklahoma prison system needs to “catch up” with the rest of the Union. We need to stop locking up people and throwing away the key in the name of justice.
Oklahoma could install mandatory parole after 85% on violent crimes, 50-75% on non-violent crimes. Mandatory paroles would eliminate the need for a parole board as well as the cost of a parole board.
Discharged offenders are more likely to re-offend without supervision. Parolees are kept under better scrutiny. If all inmates had to be under the watchful eye of a parole officer during the last 15-50% of their sentences the odds of them successfully transitioning back into society would be greatly increased.
A Truth in Sentencing Grid would put “truth” in sentencing. The Oklahoma prison system is under multiple sentencing systems. A favorable sentencing grid put in retroactively would put the prison system under one easily understood and maintained system. The use of a sentencing grid would save the high cost of jury trials by offenders agreeing to plea bargains set within matrix. Jury members would better understand the amount of time offenders would actually have to serve (10 years actually means 10 years). A retroactive grid would eliminate ridiculous sentences made up by jury members or district attorneys and provide for more uniform sentencing. A retroactive grid would ease Oklahoma’s over-crowding in our prison system by providing for the release of those who were given sentences in the past that were way out of line with common sense. Money saved by grid implementation could be better used in programs like education, health care, and rehabilitation. Another policy that would help with sentencing and allow for release of many older inmates would be to commute “life” sentences to 45 year sentences. Statistics show that only 1% of all inmates 50 years old or older ever re-offend. What possible good does it do to continue to keep people locked up who are considered by society to be “senior citizens”? The odds of them re-offending is so much smaller than the odds of anyone in society offending in the first place.
Ankle monitors could be worn by violent offenders during the last 15% of their sentence while they are on parole. They could purchase GPS ankle monitors as well as pay a monthly fee to wear them. This would greatly reduce the DOC budget while providing income from the purchase of the monitors and monthly fees.
There are many financial advantages to lowering incarceration rates by increasing parole numbers. Offenders paying monthly dues to parole officers would generate more income to hire more parole officers. Offenders working jobs in society, paying state and federal taxes would better benefit Oklahoma overall. Oklahoma’s offenders could be taxed specifically to help pay for new programs and rehabilitation. Taxes paid by paroled offenders could be used for faith based programs, step-down programs, counseling, drug and alcohol programs, and “out-reach” programs for children to help prevent them from becoming criminals.
Many steps can be taken to improve our justice and prison system in Oklahoma. The above mentioned are only a few of these. I encourage our elected officials and the public to do everything possible to implement these improvements. Not only will they benefit inmates and their families but they will provide much needed financial relief to all Oklahomans. They will be a great benefit to all of us.
